Don't get me wrong, I'm glad for any buff to holy priests. I know a lot of people (some endgame guilds members too, aka a lot better players than me) say that holy is fine and awesome and all that, but the wols dont really show it. I just wish they came out with something that doesn't, for once, deepen the 10 man issue and 2nd, pushes holy into the feeling that what they do in between those 3 minutes is less relevant. I generally appreciate more smaller adjustments in more places rather than a huge buff in one place. I think what they are doing with atonement is at least the right way to do it: a little off from smite by the glyph, a little less from atonement healing generally, a little less from penance...it adds up but from several little things. Now if only they would put in some interesting things for disc in the really underused spells like renew/binding and it would be nice.

For holy I'd have preferred them giving up the whole "we dont want sanctuary to be a different colored healing rain" thing and just make the damn spell worth casting, its painfully underused for something that should be a signature spell. A healthy reduction to chakra cd would also rock. Some utility would rock.

Healing for me atm feels quite bloated, there's a lot of "passive healing" going on - aegis/atonement for disc, IH for palas, eol/lightspring for holy, shamans get the bulk of their healing from 3 mins cds, druids seem to be less passive, but they also lag a lot. It feels the win class of the expansion is the one with most passive healing.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad for any buff to holy priests. I know a lot of people (some endgame guilds members too, aka a lot better players than me) say that holy is fine and awesome and all that, but the wols dont really show it. I just wish they came out with something that doesn't, for once, deepen the 10 man issue and 2nd, pushes holy into the feeling that what they do in between those 3 minutes is less relevant. I generally appreciate more smaller adjustments in more places rather than a huge buff in one place. I think what they are doing with atonement is at least the right way to do it: a little off from smite by the glyph, a little less from atonement healing generally, a little less from penance...it adds up but from several little things. Now if only they would put in some interesting things for disc in the really underused spells like renew/binding and it would be nice.

For holy I'd have preferred them giving up the whole "we dont want sanctuary to be a different colored healing rain" thing and just make the damn spell worth casting, its painfully underused for something that should be a signature spell. A healthy reduction to chakra cd would also rock. Some utility would rock.

Healing for me atm feels quite bloated, there's a lot of "passive healing" going on - aegis/atonement for disc, IH for palas, eol/lightspring for holy, shamans get the bulk of their healing from 3 mins cds, druids seem to be less passive, but they also lag a lot. It feels the win class of the expansion is the one with most passive healing.

They are somewhat correct. Holy is fine output wise, and it was fine output wise in 5.1 as well. Problem is, encounters aren't built around raw healing anymore (and the very few that did during 5.1, holy shined pretty nicely), and this is where holy suffers, as the spec got nothing else to offer, compared to say, disc, which can heal via dpsing, can use absorbs, and can also heal the "old fashioned way". Add mana restrictions and chakra, and you got yourself a fairly limited spec with lots of shiny numbers that ultimately don't cut it.

I also agree about passive healing. While I do feel it has a spot, it is way too rewarded than actual active spell casting. "I WIN" buttons such DH don't make you a good/smart healer. Same goes for Atonment (with DA no less), or Paladin's mastery, and so on.

Chakra don't need just a CD reduce, it still wouldn't be possible to triage heal in a better way (mix ST with AoE spells), and won't let us be more helpful at ST healing while in AoE stance, and that is what we need to loose (especially for 10 m).

How will this "buff" help the situation of holy priests in 10 mans? Did blizzard come to the conclusion that they were really underpowered in 25 mans but perfectly fine in 10s?

Hopefully blizzard came to their senses and stopped considering 10m as serious raiding.

As big as these buffs may be, PW:B will still beat Divine Hymn on every fight where your raid can stack inside of it, 'cause of the simple reason being that preventing/absorbing damage is always better than healing it up. Any fight so far that required a disc priest will still require one anyways.

Last edited by veiledy0; 2013-04-23 at 01:40 PM.

When you cried I'd wipe away all of your tears
When you'd scream I'd fight away all of your fears
And I held your hand through all of these years

Hopefully blizzard came to their senses and stopped considering 10m as serious raiding.

As big as these buffs may be, PW:B will still beat Divine Hymn on every fight where your raid can stack inside of it, 'cause of the simple reason being that preventing/absorbing damage is always better than healing it up. Any fight so far that required a disc priest will still require one anyways.

10m raiding is just as dead serious as 25m. The fact is, some fights are actually tougher on 10m, and you can't "spam classes" like you can sometimes do on 25m. In the current state of WoW, most guilds are having tough times to build even a proper 10m group, as there are barely any decent players out there. Some realms do not even have 25 proper raiders in them, as funny as it may sound. Also keep in mind that some players aren't playing with PCs that can support 25m in fluid framerates, while 10s is a non-issue (much less chaos on screen). So while I get why people think 25m is "real raiding", I disagree that 10s isn't.

As for DH, you are forgetting it gives a 10% healing buff to the players, so that can also help quite a bit. Doesn't DH heal more than what Barrier can absorb as well?

i was happy with the buff but then again THEY GOT RID OF DIVINE HYMN ON DISC T.T (i hardly play holy sorry only on H tortos/tsulong)

good buff for 25man holy priests out there

Tbh I don't think disc needed/deserved DH, they got their own raid cds, they don't need DH as well. That would have given them 3 raid cds (1 being a 1 minute cd) and holy just 1 (2 if you consider Lightwell). I also don't get why non-resto druids get Tranq, its really funny.

10m raiding is just as dead serious as 25m. The fact is, some fights are actually tougher on 10m, and you can't "spam classes" like you can sometimes do on 25m. In the current state of WoW, most guilds are having tough times to build even a proper 10m group, as there are barely any decent players out there. Some realms do not even have 25 proper raiders in them, as funny as it may sound. Also keep in mind that some players aren't playing with PCs that can support 25m in fluid framerates, while 10s is a non-issue (much less chaos on screen). So while I get why people think 25m is "real raiding", I disagree that 10s isn't.

I'm not a fan of the debates of which is "harder" than the other, I never raided 10 mans and all I know is that at least on my server, there are 3 times more 10 mans above or at same progress with the top 25 mans. Maybe on other realms its the other way around.

Spamming classes is the same in both formats really: taking 2xfotm class in a 10 man would be the same as taking 5 of the fotm class in a 25 man, yet, that is rarely the case. My personal gripe with 10/25 is the impossibility to balance them really, rather than which is harder (which is an aspect I dont give a toss about, everybody has the choice to raid whatever feels more rewarding for them). Most 25 man healing teams dont mind having a holy priest or a resto druid, while they are rare in the 10 mans which generally go for the top notch combo of disc/pala. Further more, if you think building a proper 10 man is hard, you should try building a proper 25 man. You might discover it being a bit harder, especially when your "top raiders" get annoyed after a week of wiping and say "lets ditch the failures and go 10 man with the best ppl" - something I avoid like the plague in my guild. It's true that some realms dont have 25 man teams, but the argument of a lot of people not being able to run 25 mans on their computers isn't that huge really. I have a friend playing on an antique dual core in which he barely managed to fit a minimum gpu (it's one of those hp-s with a minicase and built in gpu) - so the requirements are really not that harsh. Sure, for some people it is true, but the much larger argument is really the fact that 25 mans are a nightmare to manage, and they fall really easily in the "lets give up, go 10 man with our best ppl" thing, followed immediately by guild drama.

Sorry for OT, back on topic

As for DH, you are forgetting it gives a 10% healing buff to the players, so that can also help quite a bit. Doesn't DH heal more than what Barrier can absorb as well?

It depends on the encounter really, though I suspect that is the case in a 10 man, which makes the current change logical. Barrier is a great raid cd but it needs some conditions for it to be "that good" - people being stacked, concentrated damage, even better when the damage is ticking for at least 10 seconds. For megaera hc 25 man rampages, I assume barrier is amazing. For bosses where everybody is spread when the damage is coming, or the damage isn't completely predictable, its worse.

I think barrier has the advantage of being able to prevent overkills, while hymn has a better flexibility. There are encounters where barrier/hymn are not even needed at all as raid cds, but you can always pad meters a little with an hymn. Padding them with invisible mitigation is less appealing.

"you can always pad meters a little with an hymn. Padding them with invisible mitigation is less appealing" - I would absolutly looooove to see the dmg prevented by all classes as healing done in logs. It's as outdated to have some raid CDs show on meters while others don't as it was when absorbs wasnt counted as healing. Maybe that would make it a whole lot more fun aswell

I'm not a fan of the debates of which is "harder" than the other, I never raided 10 mans and all I know is that at least on my server, there are 3 times more 10 mans above or at same progress with the top 25 mans. Maybe on other realms its the other way around.

Spamming classes is the same in both formats really: taking 2xfotm class in a 10 man would be the same as taking 5 of the fotm class in a 25 man, yet, that is rarely the case. My personal gripe with 10/25 is the impossibility to balance them really, rather than which is harder (which is an aspect I dont give a toss about, everybody has the choice to raid whatever feels more rewarding for them). Most 25 man healing teams dont mind having a holy priest or a resto druid, while they are rare in the 10 mans which generally go for the top notch combo of disc/pala. Further more, if you think building a proper 10 man is hard, you should try building a proper 25 man. You might discover it being a bit harder, especially when your "top raiders" get annoyed after a week of wiping and say "lets ditch the failures and go 10 man with the best ppl" - something I avoid like the plague in my guild. It's true that some realms dont have 25 man teams, but the argument of a lot of people not being able to run 25 mans on their computers isn't that huge really. I have a friend playing on an antique dual core in which he barely managed to fit a minimum gpu (it's one of those hp-s with a minicase and built in gpu) - so the requirements are really not that harsh. Sure, for some people it is true, but the much larger argument is really the fact that 25 mans are a nightmare to manage, and they fall really easily in the "lets give up, go 10 man with our best ppl" thing, followed immediately by guild drama.

Sorry for OT, back on topic

It depends on the encounter really, though I suspect that is the case in a 10 man, which makes the current change logical. Barrier is a great raid cd but it needs some conditions for it to be "that good" - people being stacked, concentrated damage, even better when the damage is ticking for at least 10 seconds. For megaera hc 25 man rampages, I assume barrier is amazing. For bosses where everybody is spread when the damage is coming, or the damage isn't completely predictable, its worse.

I think barrier has the advantage of being able to prevent overkills, while hymn has a better flexibility. There are encounters where barrier/hymn are not even needed at all as raid cds, but you can always pad meters a little with an hymn. Padding them with invisible mitigation is less appealing.

Off topic:

Yep, that's exactly my point. In the current state of the game building a 10 man group is really tough, so I can only imagine how nightmare-ish it is to get 25 capable people together at the same time, and I guess that's one of the reasons so many resort to 10s or just stick with LFR or raid as pugs, spamming trade. As for computer requirments, I can tell I play WoW on a Core 2 Duo, 4GB Ram and a decent, above average nVidia GPU, I never have any problems on 10s but LFR does slow down quite a bit (and its the same as 25m in that regard). Keep in mind I play at a very average graphics setup, avoiding most of the high quality effects and such, just to keep the framerate up as much as possible.